To be honest, I think 夫 shouldn’t be translated as a pronoun in this case, but rather than a deictic initial particle (as described by Unger in his grammar (in German)) or as an introductory particle announcing a topic (as seen in the Pulleyblank (in English)). Even if we want to put the king of Qi’s son as the subject (instead of “we”, as I did), I’d still translate 夫 as a deictic particle and assume the subject was omitted. I’d do that because 夫 is used like this way more often than as a pronoun.
– PhilippOct 3 '15 at 7:36